Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14167
| From | "Marty E. Plummer" <hanetzer@startmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: Bash patches format |
| Date | 2018-05-29 19:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.751.1527639998.1292.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | <20180519134601.u3dfrjzip3do7daj@proprietary-killer> <2b5ce5fe-3250-ba63-4ad7-0326ac5a5707@case.edu> |
On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 11:05:45AM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 5/19/18 9:46 AM, Marty E. Plummer wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > In doing some research into ways to better improve the gentoo ebuild qa, > > I ran across the fact that the official bash patches are provided as > > -p0, context diffs. > > > > I was hoping I could convince you to convert to -p1, unified diffs, such > > as are produced by diff -u or git format-patch, for the following > > reasons. > > > > 1. <opinion> unified diffs are easier to size up at a glance as compared > > to an equivalent context diff; the two following snippets cover the same > > data/changes, but the unified diff is easier to read at a glance: > > Interesting. I find the opposite to be true. > Fair, but as I stated at the start, pure opinion. > > 2. unified diffs are, generally speaking, smaller than an equivalent > > context diff, as in hunks where lines are added and removed or changed > > (instead of just adding or removing lines), the hunk is copied twice in > > a context diff. Depending on the general composition of a patch, an > > equivalent unified diff is about 1/3 smaller than the same context diff. > > Since we're talking a few thousand characters here, this isn't much of > a difference or savings. > Also fair and true, but I thought it was a valid point to make so I did. > > 3. A lot of downstream consumers are already taking these patches and > > converting them to -p1 unified diffs in their source repos already, or, > > barring that, have to make explicit exceptions to the 'norm' for their > > packaging/buildscripts. > > They have to do this anyway, since most of the distributions use their > own source base that is nearly, but not quite, identical to bash as > shipped. > Well, the patches are identical, excepting the format difference. > If people are willing to do the conversion between patch formats for their > own purposes, more power to them. I don't see any compelling reason to > change the format I use. > Could I at least convince you to start doing -p1, if not unified? > -- > ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer > ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates > Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Bash patches format "Marty E. Plummer" <hanetzer@startmail.com> - 2018-05-29 19:25 -0500
csiph-web